Universal church or Local church only?

I always thought that all local churches believes that they belong to the universal church. But I recently i encounter a view of the church that is new to me. It is like this:

the word "church" always referred to local church/es in the Epistles because this writings are addressed to a local church in Ephesians, Collosians, Laodiceans etc..

Every local church is a body of Christ, I am somewhat skeptic of this, because the word "bodies of Christ" never occurred in Scripture and Christ has only one bride, it will be "polygamy" to think otherwise.

I think the implication of this view is to view unity and commands to the church as being relevant to the local church only.

What do you think?

Are there other strong points that this view is false?

I read through sentences where the word "church" appeared. And most, I think, it may just really refers to that local church although there are few exceptions. With all the divisions in church history, do you think this view may be probably right?

But I don't think so personally, because of the negative effect of this to "seekers" that have just bee offended by divisions of groups in Christianity who don't go along with each other.

The objection I think stems from the pyramid model that the RCC have started and other groups who think they are the true only the "True Church".
But I believe the Biblical view is very far from that model.

here are some links to this view: http://www.baptistpillar.com/article_256.html

http://www.bbcn.org/filerequest/2135

Hey Joliboy,

It seems to me that the moment a certain expression of the church begins to name itself according to some man's imagination, they are already setting themselves apart from others as having something others don't and by the very nature of things are acting divisively, intentionally or not. (As if any local body of believers could have any more of Christ than is already given)

The body of Christ are all true spiritual members of Christ, whether in a local church or not. (Of course, being part of a local gathering of believers is encouraged)
The universal church, as I understand it, includes all Christian churches everywhere, so that local churches all form part of the universal church. You cannot have one without the other?

Blessings,

Joliboy: The word "church" in the New Testament simply means the assembly. Jesus spoke of the church as His body. In this sense it is the universal assembly of born again believers. Paul greets Priscilla and Aquilla in Acts and says to greet the church that is in their house. This is a local assembly of believers.

The church is the universal body of Christ, but it meets in local bodies all over the world. Both are the church. One a subset of the other. I don't think it is any more complicated than that.

There is no concept of Universal CHurch at all in Bible. It is a term coined by those who do not want to submit to a local church leadership and coined a term universal church so that they will not miss on all the verses applicable only to body of believers.

Every believer is imbalance. No one man can do the work of Jesus. We can either be an evangelist or a preacher or a prophet or any gifted member. All these gifts are for edification of a local church. If a person is not part of local Church but claims to be part of an imaginary universal church then he is deceived. Truth is not in him. All these individual gifts will make sense only when they work together as a local body. No one can serve God independent of other believers.

Let us not debate with human logic on whether Universal Church exists or not, which Bible clearly does not mentions. But Bible clearly speaks of Local Body of believers. All the Epistles are written to local Church. In Revelation, Jesus writes letters addressing only Local Church. He is not even concerned about any Christian who lives in say Smyrna but not part of the Church of Smyrna. Such man is not even considered by Jesus in Revelation. So think about it these days, people who exist in different cities as Christians but not part of any local body in their city. These so called Christians who are unwilling to submit to any local Body Of Christ. Let us weep for them. Instead of discussing on any imaginary Universal Body.

I know, the phrase "universal church" does not appear on Scripture, how about the body of Christ? the bride of Christ?

take for example:
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Ephesians 5:6

Is Paul, specifically just speaking here on the Ephesian church? or all churches? he uses singular form, meaning universal-as one.

Is every local church, body of Christ?

I think like the Trinity, local churches are distinct and yet part of one body.

How about Jesus prayer on unity is it only in the context of a local church?

should we not have fellowship with other Christians in other local churches?

Are prophets, teachers and apostles must only operate for the maturity of a local church?

Sree wrote :
/// There is no concept of Universal CHurch at all in Bible. It is a term coined by those who do not want to submit to a local church leadership and coined a term universal church so that they will not miss on all the verses applicable only to body of believers.///

Could you please provide your research for making that accusation ?

A.W. Tozer used the phrase "Universal Church"

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/articles/index.php?view=article&aid=5087

add :

Spurgeon also used the term :

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=58970&forum=35

Brother, you need to revisit that statement. You have now reduced the new creature in Christ, the Born again man who is born of the Spirit and who walks in the Kingdom of God and belongs to the Body of Christ to a mere member of a local religious gathering. We all are brothers and sisters, not because we belong to a local church but because we belong to Jesus. Whatever you may think of attendance of churches as opposed to any other kind of gatherings, that has no bearing on the whether a man is saved or not...........bro Frank

Now does he really belong to the Body Of Christ? Even though he is not part of a local Church? Absolutely not. Calling him a body of Christ means he is an organ in Christ. How can an organ exist alone? Can an eye or ear or even heart exist alone? Not At ALL. Then how is there a concept of a believer being part of a body remain alone?

I believe people who are not part of local Church are those who do NOT LOVE JESUS at all. How can someone love the Head Jesus but not his Body the Church? Can a man say to a women that he loves her head but not her body? If there is true love for head, there will also be a true love for body and a need to join with the body.

If a local body to you is only a local religious gathering, then it only says how much you have degraded to respect Church to which the apostles wrote epistles. Jesus wrote letters addressing Churches in Revelation.

I did not have even 1% understanding of Church as I have now when I was born again. I have never attended a Church before I was born again because I came from a different faith. But from the time I accepted Jesus as a savior, I also had a great longing in my heart to fellowship with fellow believers in Jesus. To submit to the head and also to the elders appointed by the head. No one told me the need to be in a fellowship, it was automatically birthed inside me by Holy Spirit.

There is no concept of such lonely Christian at all in New Testament time. All the believers were immediately united with a local body of believers. But in modern times, believers think so highly of themselves that they do not find any need to fellowship or even submit to a local body of believers. Such loners started getting approval (or acceptance) in Christendom these days. It is because of the approval, they spread more. Just like how Homosexuality and Divorce get approval in society. Such lonely believers also got approval in Christendom these days.

Could you please provide your research for making that accusation ?

See by universal Church, if a person denotes a global representation of all local churches then it is different. But most of them here use universal Church to denote an invisible Church in which all born again believers are part of, irrespective of whether they are part of a local Church or not. This term and understanding never existed during New Testament time. I totally believe this understanding in unbiblical and totally not part of God's purpose for a believer or his Church.

Is Paul, specifically just speaking here on the Ephesian church? or all churches? he uses singular form, meaning universal-as one.

Is every local church, body of Christ?

Each Church is an individual body of Christ. Whether they agree it or not. There are bodies that are totally week due to loose connection of members. They are giants but with poor joints. This how I see mega Churches. Since they do not encourage fellowship of believers, there is no connection between members here.

If each Church is individually not a body then why is Jesus writing letters to each Church separately? He could have written one letter to the universal Church and asked the apostle to read it for all the individual members. Why take time and effort to write to each of them?

How this individual bodies are presented to Jesus as a single bride, is not something that we have to be concerned. If the Bible is silent on one subject then let us also learn to be silent, rather than using our imaginations here.

How about Jesus prayer on unity is it only in the context of a local church?

Jesus prayed that believers should be perfected in unity (John 17:23). Not to be perfected alone. Only those who are proud and think they are already perfect, will seek to be alone without fellowshiping with other saints. A true believer who is seeking perfection, will always seek to be perfected in unity with other believers.

should we not have fellowship with other Christians in other local churches?

As long as the two bodies are still connected to same head, Jesus Christ then they can easily fellowship and connect.

Are prophets, teachers and apostles must only operate for the maturity of a local church?

Yes they are. There is no Prophet or teacher or apostle outside the concept of Church. They are all gifted accordingly for the edification of Church. Even Evangelists are for Church only. They are all part of a Church and work towards Church.

Ephesians 4:11 - And it was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for works of ministry, to build up the body of Christ,...

Every work that we do should end up building the Body of Christ.

Based on Ephesians 4:11 that I quoted, there is no travelling evangelist concept at all. No one can keep travelling here and there spreading the Gospel, without being part of a Church. Biblical way of Evangelism should be done from a Church to build up a Church. Those who accept Christ should also be added to the Church.

"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
to the general assembly and CHURCH of the firstborn who are registered in heaven......." Hebrews 12:22-23

Registered in heaven, NOT on the local church membership role!

Sounds like the universal church to me!

RE : /// I believe people who are not part of local Church are those who do NOT LOVE JESUS at all. How can someone love the Head Jesus but not his Body the Church? Can a man say to a women that he loves her head but not her body? If there is true love for head, there will also be a true love for body and a need to join with the body.///

Many are displaced from any local assembly right now because many have been hurt and have been manipulated and spirtually abused by various local assemblies also many are of the feeling that many of the local assemblies seem to more resemble a harlot than a bride.

When we lived in Colorado we where unable to find an adequate fellowship.

clarity

"Each church is individual Body of Christ."

I don't think that this concept is found in the Bible brother, there is only one body of Christ in the earth.

"If each Church is individually not a body then why is Jesus writing letters to each Church separately? He could have written one letter to the universal Church and asked the apostle to read it for all the individual members. Why take time and effort to write to each of them?"

I agree brother, because every local church is distinct. Every situation on the church is different. But does not invalidate that all Christians comprises the body of Christ, the bride of Christ.

What about Philip baptizing the Ethiopian Enuch and just left immediately, he was teleported?

And I think Paul was a traveling apostle, though he spent more time on a church than the others.
-----------

According to your view, What is then the minimum requirement for a church to be a church?

---

Jesus put a balance here:
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6

That is why others are "hanging" and don't go to a "church" near them.

I agree brother, because every local church is distinct. Every situation on the church is different. But does not invalidate that all Christians comprises the body of Christ, the bride of Christ.

If Jesus is writing a separate letter just because the situations are different makes no sense. He could have still written a single letter addressing all the different situation, right? For example I can write a single letter to a family addressing all the members of it, even though their situations are different.

I can prove this from scripture itself. Let us see how Jesus was dwelling among Churches.

Rev 12-13:- Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands; and in the middle of the lampstands I saw one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across His chest with a golden sash.

What are these 7 distinct lampstands?

Verse 20-
As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

So each Church was represented by an individual lampstand here. A lampstand has 7 branches, so if all the Churches are part of one body, then each Church should represent different branch of a single lampstand, instead they are all individual lampstands! How can Jesus make it so clear to us that each Church is individual body by itself? In OT it was Israel represented by a single lampstand but now each Church it self represented by a single lampstand.

And I think Paul was a traveling apostle, though he spent more time on a church than the others.

Based on the passage I have quoted, Apostles are also given to equip Church. That is exactly what Paul was doing. He was travelling place to place to plant Churches. If you ask Paul where his converts are, he will take you to each Church in the areas where he traveled. He was also not doing it alone, he always had coworkers.

New Testament pattern of doing God's work is not doing it alone. Our Lord Jesus sent Apostles in twos (Luke 10:1). So they always worked with other believers for God's kingdom.

Philp sharing the Gospel to Enuch is similar to how we are expected to share the Gospel in our workplace, first by our life then by our words. I cannot expect my coworkers in Christ from my Church to come with me there to share the Gospel. As I travel if I happen to find someone with need, I can always share the Gospel. But I cannot keep doing it alone as my service to Kingdom of God. Philip Soon planted a Church in Samaria. That was his main ministry.

According to your view, What is then the minimum requirement for a church to be a church?

2 or more gathering together in Jesus name is good enough. 2 families are more than sufficient to form a Church. If there is a unity of Spirit. If they submit to one another. If they all together connected by one Head, Jesus Christ. Then it is a Church. The Church that I am part of, we have only 4 committed families. That is good enough. We are open to others joining us. we invite other families as well. Many of them choose to be visitors! But if they are unwilling to be part of this body of believers, we cannot help. It is God who builds his Church, he will add those for whom He has the burden.
It was Noah's responsibility to construct the Ark, it was God who decided who should be in. The Ark is a perfect symbol of Church in NT time. Outside the Ark there is only death!

That is why others are "hanging" and don't go to a "church" near them.

If they really have a burden to see the Church of Jesus to be built in their locality, assuming all the Churches near them have backslidden. Then God will definitely unite them with other believers who have similar burden. The point is they do not have this burden.

Most of those who are boasting to be part of NO CHURCH, have a deep arrogance inside them. If they are honest they will accept this. Their spiritual pride makes it impossible for them to work with other believers. It would have been humbling for Apostle Paul to work with younger believers like Timothy and Silas. But he still did it, because that was God's will for Paul. Not to be a loner like these super spiritual Christians of these days!

While being part of the local church is the ideal, when the church is in a bad state of apostasy God sometimes orchestrates unique ways to care for His children. Years ago I with a few others were denied church privileges in an assembly we were part of because we would not help to cover up some corruption in leadership. After taking a stand in this way God revealed Himself to me in a glorious way which I had never deemed possible before. After that, even though I am part of a fellowship, I realized that nothing can separate me from being a part of the true body of Christ except me being too overcome by the fear of man to stand up for truth. Right now there is a moving of God which I am aware of in an almost "dead" denomination. God leads people to salvation in the most intriguing ways and they frequently remain in the same church until they are forced out, but in the meantime lead others to the Lord within the religious culture. A few days ago I was privileged to sit around a table, "breaking pizza" with three young folk of this people group sharing the closest spiritual fellowship with them I have ever known among believers. I was old enough to be their father or grandfather but it made no difference. Their spiritual encouragement comes from private Bible studies done in their own language with those who are born again.
Whether my spiritual gifts are recognized within my local fellowship or not makes little difference - God brings people into the lives of of my wife and me through which I can exercise them anyway. Even the gift of prophesy has been exercised when the church failed to recognize the gift - as God directed certain people to pray against specific things which endangered the fellowship. The gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church but the strategies of the battle are up to our Commander and His methods are wonderfully varied. I desire to be close enough to Him to be able to receive the exact instructions for the occasion. Let us not attempt to put God into a box!

That is an accusation that is sad and can only have one source brother, you need to repent of that.

First Apolos, you have not quoted me fully. See in what context I said about Church and love for Jesus. If you think I am wrong then give me a logical answer to this question. If you cannot give then it is you who needs to repent (with all respect)!

How can someone love Jesus and not his body? How can a man say to a women that he loves her head but not her body? How can there not be a desire in someone who loves Jesus to not fellowship with his body (Church). If a person is truly in love with Jesus then he will not stop until he gets in contact with a true Body of Jesus. He will not boast about how super spiritual he is without a Church, nor defend it in Internet forum like this!

Everything I have posted here is scripture both from Ephesians and Revelation. If you have anything against the point I am inferring, you have to first quote your understanding of those scripture. If you have no scripture to offer then your understanding is not right at all or subjective.

If Matt 18:20 is so generic and can be applicable to any 2 people gathering together then why was Jesus standing out side and knocking the doors of Leodicia Church when the people there where assuming that they are gathering in Jesus name? (Rev 3:20).

Compare scripture with scripture to avoid all such deceptions. The epistles and the letters of Jesus in revelation are all written for Churches. If you are unwilling to be part of a Church then tear those pages and live with rest of your Bible!

By being part of a Church, I do not mean sitting in a dead denomination. It is to be committed to a set of believers. Every part in our body is committed to work together, they just do not work with anyone randomly. They both give and receive from other parts. A Christian is supposed to be committed to other Christians in his locality. Just saying "hello how are you", or chatting in an internet forum are not commitment. It is mockery of God intended fellowship of saints.